‘Panic of 2023’: James Corbett Explains How Bank Crisis Could Lead to CBDC ‘Nightmare of Total Monetary Control’

Investigative journalist James Corbett recently called the ongoing global banking crisis involving SVB, Signature Bank, Credit Suisse and others the “Panic of 2023” and compared it to historical precedents, pointing to a bleak, technological surveillance future that is inevitable if nothing is done to leverage central bank digital currency (CBDC). As Corbett puts it, the answer to the CBDC’s “currency management nightmare” is cash, creativity, and “choosing to be informed about the agorism and counter-economy.”

James Corbett: Investigative Journalist and Freedom Activist James Corbett on the Crisis, CBDCs, Cash, and the Counter Economy in

18} The Corbett ReportMr. Children,” a popular alternative news source based on “open source intelligence principles,” recently focused on the current global banking collapse and its recent historical repercussions. Moreover, he has been warning his followers for years about the dangers of abandoning financial freedom and uncritically embracing burgeoning state-sponsored financial technologies such as Central Bank Digital Currencies (CTC).

Bitcoin. com News sent several questions to Mr. Corbett, asking for his views on the current crisis, its causes, and how the public can survive the current so-called banking contagion. Here are his responses.

Bitcoin. com News (BCN): In your recent writings, you have drawn parallels between the current banking collapse and the panic of 1907 and the financial crisis of 2008 that is now unfolding at SVB, Signature Bank, Credit Suisse, etc. How does what is unfolding now at SVB, Signature Bank, Credit Suisse, etc. compare to past financial crises?

James Corbett, JC: In 1907, the collapse of the Knickerbocker Trust, New York’s largest trust company, led to a 50% crash on the New York Stock Exchange. The official page on the event states “The Panic of 1907“the first global financial crisis of the 20th century,” as the Fed called it; according to the Fed, the panic was triggered by rumors of the insolvency of the Knickerbocker Trust, and the crisis eventually led to the banking system was averted by the “legendary actions” of J. P. Morgan, who personally oversaw the rescue of the

What the Federal Reserve does not note in its official history of the Panic of 1907, as even Life Magazineadmits decades lateris that the rumor that triggered the whole affair was that J. P. Morgan’s business partner, one Perkins, one of J.P. Morgan’s business partners. Also missing from the Fed’s whitewashed history lesson is the fact that Morgan used the incident as a pretext to eliminate a competitor in the banking industry (Knickerbocker Trust) and bail out a fellow banking industry partner (American Trust Company, which had deep ties to many of Morgan’s clients).

Come 2023, things get interesting evenBloomberg reports on the eerie similarities between the rumors and the Morgan-as-Saver pattern in the Silicon Valley Bank collapse:

“A prominent venture capitalist advised them to pull their money out of Silicon Valley Bank, and mega-financial institutions such as JP Morgan Chase&Co tried to persuade some SVB clients to move their money Thursday by touting the safety of their assets.”

And, as the Financial Timeslater confirmed,SVB’s troubles and the resulting instability at local banks attracted depositors to the perceived safety of the largest banks, including, of course, JPMorgan Chase.

BCN: In the latest episode of James Evan Pilato’s “New World Next Week,”Crypto Contagion Bank Gets a Runyou pointed out the inconsistencies in the official story surrounding the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and referred to an audit of the bank just prior to its collapse. Similarly, Signature Bank board member Barney Frank, who was also surprised by Signature bank’s failure, recently stated that regulators are trying to send an “anti-crypto message.” In your view, is what we are seeing now enjoined?

JC:Yes, this banking “contagion” is an engineered phenomenon. But to understand the phenomenon, we need to ask a further question: at what level was it manipulated?

After all, there are multiple factors that contributed to SVB’s downfall, including its concentration inESGandDEI

and other forms of

.” The immediate proximate cause of the “woke” investment-bank crash was the strange predicament of too much cash.

After all, although there are multiple factors that contributed to SVB’s collapse.

the immediate proximate cause was the strange predicament of too much cash.

Banks make money by lending out their customers’ deposits, and by “making money” we meanliterally making moneyIn the banking world, a high loan-to-deposit ratio (LDR) is considered a good thing, with 80-90% LDR being the ideal numberHowever, SVB was found to have too much money, with only $74 billion in loans against $173 billion in customer deposits.

So they decided to keep that money in long-term US Treasuries, the safest (but not really safe), risk-free (but not really risky), and as good (but literally as good as gold) investment. After all, the only time you could lose money on US Treasuries is if the Fed starts raising interest rates like crazy, and they haven’t done that for decades. What’s the problem?

Oh, wait.

In short, the SVB bought $120 billion worth of long-term Treasuries when they were yielding 1.78% and as the yield rose to 5%, the SVB had to book billions of dollars in losses. In fact, the 2022 annual report released in January showed that SVB was saddled with $15 billionin “unrealized losses”from bad bond bets.

Yes, SVB’s collapse was orchestrated by the Fed. This crisis is a direct result of the Fed’s attempt to back out of the disastrous decade-and-a-half-long artificial bond bubble that it blew to stop the global financial crisis of 2008. And what caused the global financial crisis? The nearly decade-long disastrous artificial housing bubble that the Fed blew to stop the effects of the dot-com recession, the 9/11 slowdown, and the Enron/WorldCom scam.

BCN: You point out that the current crisis could be used as an excuse for central banks to introduce digital currencies more quickly. In such a case, what would be your view on how this would unfold and who would be the biggest winners and losers?

JC: To answer this question, let me ask another: why is the Fed so interested in the Panic of 1907? It is becausethey are interested in the “Panic of 1907,” asthey themselves claim. The crisis caused by that particular banking panic “stimulated the monetary reform movement and led to the creation of the Federal Reserve.”

Of course, like everything else that comes out of the mouths of bankers, this statement is a lie. Actually, there are two lies.

First, it is a lie about fees. The monetary reform movement, whichlater became a popular political force, encompassed the “Crime of 1873”, the “Free Silver Movement”, “Bimetallism”, “William Jennings Bryan”, the “Golden Cross”, “So,“Oz Wizard– was certainly not “inspired” by the Panic of 1907.

It was not only the Morgan rumor that caused the panic in the first place, but also theinfamous Jekyll Island meetingthat actually led to the creation of the Federal Reserve System.

The crisis generated by the Panic of 1907 led to the destruction of the existing monetary order and the creation of the Federal Reserve.

Similarly, it is hard to imagine that a full-scale revolution in the banking system today could not have originated from some banking crisis. What is certain is that governments around the world will not hesitate to use such crises as an excuse to bring about a new digital monetary order. After all, the House Financial Services Committee tried to slip the creation of a digital dollar into the originalCOVID stimulus bill. Do we really think that emergency legislation for a new digital currency is not standing by ready to be unleashed on the public during the next crisis?

When this crisis leads to a pre-planned CBDC “solution,” we can expect it to unfold in much the same way as the panic of 1907 and the global financial crisis of 2007-08. In both cases, the results happened to benefit certain interests: in 1907, Morgan consolidated his banking interests, eliminated his competitors, and acted as the benevolent savior of the economy, successfully convincing the public of the need to hand over the financial reins to the banking cartel; in 2008, it was an institution connected to cronies likeAIGand (of course)JP Morganbenefited from the unprecedented bank “bailout” and the crisis helped solidify the rise of new financial giants likeBlackRockSo it is not surprising that certain banking players may have used the opportunity of the banking crisis that occurred to eliminate their competitors and strengthen their dominance in the banking world.

And as we previously discussed inhowever, not all bankers will benefit from the introduction of retail CBDCs. In fact, insofar as CBDCs cut commercial banking intermediaries off from the existing monetary circuit, it is actually against the interests of commercial bankers.

But of course, in the event of such a crisis, the real losers are, as always, us, the public. In a worst-case scenario, central banks will seize the opportunity to implement “programmable money.” The nightmare of total monetary control.

BCN: If nothing is done to check the implementation of CBDCs and the financial surveillance and espionage they potentially provide, when will we see CBDCs become ubiquitous globally?

JC:I cannot give you a date. But I can say that if nothing is done to check its implementation, CBDC will reach global ubiquity.

If I were to make a prediction about the implementation of CBDCs, it would be that we will not go from a zero CBDC monetary system to a 100% CBDC monetary system all at once; CBDCs will coexist with other payment instruments for some period of time, with different looks and functions. Some would be full retail and wholesale CBDCs, while others would perform one function or the other. Some retail CBDCs might be managed directly by the central bank, while others would authenticate banks and other financial institutions to act as intermediaries and issue wallets to the public.

But in whatever form and at whatever time, the initial introduction of CBDCs will be the proverbial camel’s nose in the tent. From that point on, it is only a matter of time before CBDC becomes an instrument of financial surveillance and control.

BCN: In the current chaotic climate of the so-called banking epidemic, how can everyday individuals help maintain and enhance their financial privacy and economic sovereignty?

JC:Are you ready to hear the good news: we don’t need meticulous planning or high-level access to high-tech equipment to thwart CBDC’s plans. The simplest tools to maintain our financial independence are already in our wallets.

When CBDCs are first introduced, they will almost certainly coexist with other payment methods, so cash will still be an option unless the public is conditioned to accept a completely cashless economy.

The simplest tool for maintaining financial independence is already in our wallets, and that is cash.

And of course, the ongoingWar on Cashis already making it harder to use cash for certain transactions, the fear of “coin shortages,dirty money {/179}.” and incentives to use electronic payments are further driving people away from using cash. That is why we must consciously support stores that accept cash and encourage people to use cash on a regular basis. Many such ideas have been proposed in recent years by agorist.market.’ s “Black Market Fridays” toSolari. com‘s “Cash Friday“

But I’m not saying that cash is the only (or even the best) option. I have long advocatedSurvival Currency” “It’s an approach where people try different forms of money and find what works for them.197} There are community currencies,199} barter, local exchange trading systems, precious metals, crypto,the miracle of Vergleand others outside the purview of central bankers. many examples of how people can trade.

As long as you belong to a community of like-minded people who are willing to participate in free exchange, you will have no shortage of money ideas to try.

BCN: Speaking of “contagion,” some have linked the current financial crisis to the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” initiative. Do you see any basis for such ideas, or are they nothing more than wild conspiracy theories?

JC: The strong focus on the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and its supposed threat of “having nothing and being happy” is in part misguided. Certainly Klaus Schwab and his cronies are power-hungry schemers, but the Great Reset is the latest rebranding of a very old game of global domination, and the World Economic Forum is just one (relatively small) player at that table.

Call it the New World Order ororInternational Rules-Based Orderor International Economic Order

or Great Reset or whatever, or Bilderberger or Trilateral or World Economic Forum or whoever, but the threat is the same, a world where humanity is at the mercy of a bunch of unaccountable technocrats.

I am not loosely invoking the name of technocracy. I mean in the real,historicalsense. I am referring to a system of “scientific engineering of society” that presupposes an economic system in which all transactions are monitored, calculated, databased, tracked, and monitored by a central “technobate” in real time, and allowed or rejected by a central administrator. Such a system would include a digital identity for every citizen and, of course, a digital currency that could be programmed to function at the whim of the technocrats.

That such a management system is technically possible is now undeniable. That stakeholders such as the World Economic Forum are working toward the realization of such a system is only denied by those who refuse to listen to the technocrats’ own pronouncements.

BCN: From your perspective, is there a cryptocurrency white pill in this?

JC:The promise of cryptocurrency is, as it has always been, a cryptographically secure tool for trading in the counter-economy.

{But if people don’t know what the counter-economy is (much less why they would want to trade in it), it won’t do them any good. If it is seen as just another get-rich-quick investment, something to be valued in dollars, an asset to be regulated by the SEC and dutifully listed on tax returns, it will be nothing more than a convenient springboard to a CBDC nightmare.

We can choose to be informed about the agorism and counter-economy, or we can continue to trade in the mainstream economy approved by the bankers and accept whatever monetary order they impose on us.

The choice is ours. For now.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Rokas Tenys / Shutterstock. com, corbettreport. com